Home · Basics · What is gender?
What is gender?
'Gender' is a relatively new concept that was imported from English in the second half of the twentieth century to distinguish the social aspect of being a man or a woman from biological sex. In practice it is now used in widely diverging ways — as a role pattern, as a self-chosen identity, and sometimes even as a replacement for the concept of sex. That conceptual confusion is no accident: it sits at the centre of the current debate.
From role pattern to identity
Originally, gender was used in sociology to describe which expectations and roles a society imposes on men and women — for example, that girls should be caring and boys tough. That analysis had value: role patterns are culturally determined and changeable.
Over the past decades, however, the meaning of 'gender' has shifted. Where it first referred to the social expectations surrounding sex, it increasingly refers to an inner, self-reported feeling of identity. That shift is not scientific progress but a conceptual expansion that many researchers — including sex researchers, developmental psychologists and legal scholars — question.
Biological sex: binary and stable
In humans, as in other mammals, biological sex is binary: there are two gamete systems (eggs and sperm), and therefore two sexes. Intersex variations (DSDs) are rare (estimated <0.02% when only true ambiguity is counted) and do not form a 'third sex'; they are deviations within the male or female developmental pathway.
Sex is moreover not 'assigned' at birth, as is sometimes claimed; it is observed and recorded on the basis of anatomy that was already formed in the womb. It is not an administrative choice but a biological fact established by doctors.
'Gender identity': how solid is the concept?
The idea that every person possesses an inner 'gender identity' that can exist apart from the body is not a scientific finding but a theoretical premise. There is no objective test for gender identity; the concept rests entirely on self-report and is defined inconsistently throughout the literature.
The British Cass Review (2024) concluded that the scientific basis underpinning a large part of gender-affirmative care is weak and that 'gender identity' is too narrow as an explanatory model for the discomfort experienced by many young people. Comparable conclusions have been reached in Sweden, Finland, Norway and Denmark, which have since substantially revised their clinical practice.
The explosion in the number of identities
The number of children and young people — mainly girls — identifying as transgender or non-binary increased ten- to twentyfold in Western countries between roughly 2010 and 2022. Researchers such as Lisa Littman point to the phenomenon of Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria: a suddenly emerging dysphoria, often in friend groups and linked to heavy social-media use. These patterns cannot be explained by a stable biological phenomenon and suggest that social influence plays a considerable role.
Yet many policy documents and teaching materials still operate on the assumption that gender is a spectrum with countless categories. That is not a scientific premise but an ideological choice.
What 'critical of gender' does and does not mean
Critical examination of gender discourse is not the same as denying the suffering of people who struggle with their bodies. Gender dysphoria is a real complaint that deserves care and serious treatment. The question is which care helps and which causes harm. The Dutch Protocol was long presented as the gold standard, but has come under international pressure in recent years because of inadequate long-term data, low drop-out rates that conflict with other studies, and growing attention to detransition.
Genderinfo.nl does not seek to favour one side in this debate, but does point out that the dominant narrative in Dutch media and policy — gender as a self-determined identity, free of biology — does not reflect a scientific consensus.